AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

A Day's Work on Sand and Ballast Haulage

11th February 1944
Page 24
Page 25
Page 24, 11th February 1944 — A Day's Work on Sand and Ballast Haulage
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Solving the Problems of the Carrier

Transcribing Some of the Rates Schedules so that Potential Earnings Per Day Can be Assessed : Criticism of a .New Rates Schedule

IN his recommendations to sand and ballast hauliers, A.C.I.S. advised them, as the concluding step in the process of summing up the conditions of operation with a view to arriving at a profitable rate, to calculate the number of trips per day that each active lorry would make.

In my interpretation of his instructions, which was, in a way, concluded in my previous article. I departed from his method and, instead of calculating the number of journeys per day, assessed the rates on a time and mileage basis. For his conditions, I allowed one hour per journey for terminal delays, assumed that the average travelling speed was 25 m.p.h., and made allowance for slower speeds and greater delays on ultra-short journeys, by using the expedient of a weightage. The figures thus obtained, and an indication of the weightage, are set out in Table VI, which is reproduced from that article.

I do, nevertheless, agree with him that it is wise to try to assess the number of journeys per day and, moreover, that without a definite basis of time and mileage charges, it is,. probably, the only way in which the average haulier ;earl calculate what his rate should be.

, .-, • .

,An Example Within the Limits

of Welghtage Application It so happens that our correspondent has given us one example from practical experience, namely 5i journeys per 84-hour day, over an eight-miles lead. It will be useful. to commence by considering that example. It is of special interest, inasmuch as it comes within the limits of application of the weightage, thus affording an opportunity of explaining, in a practical way, how that applies to an actual instance. 1 First of all, as it is impracticable, in. sand and ballast haulage, to do a half journey, we must assume that the 5i journeys constitute an average figure, that the vehicle does six journeys one day and five the next or, more probably, that the average time per journey throughout a week, or a month, is 81hours divided by 54. That is, in round figures, 93 minutes. A simple calculation will suffice

to check our figure against that. Our allowance for time is one hour, plus the time to travel 16 miles at 25 m.p.h., plus the time allowance covered in the weightage, which is assessed at 'rid. Now, if 2s. (see Table VI) be the equivalent of one hour, 74d. must equal 18.75 minutes. As the time to travel 16 miles at 25 m.p.h. is 38.4 minutes there is a total time allowance, in Table VI, of 117.15 minutes-nearly two 'hours. That is 24.15 minutes more than is needed by the vehicles of A.C.I.S. It seems, therefore, that the conditions are not so bad after all, because 36 minutes is enough for terminal delays, whereas the allowance made by the Eastern Area' A.R.O. rates committee, carried forward by Me to Table III (page 407 of "The Commercial Motor" dated January 7), was 40 minutes.

Let .me take one or two more examples from Table VI. First, the shortest run of all-a one-mile lead. There we have, still, one hour for terminals, is.. 6d. for weightage, which is equivalent to another 45 minutes, and the travelling time for two miles at 25 m.p.h., which is 4.8 minutes, say, five minutes. The total time is thus 1-hour 50 minutes, which' allows only five journeys per day. The conditions must be bad, for that to he all that is passible.

However, let us try a 25-miles, lead.In this case, the time per trip is exactly three hours, meaning that three round trips can be made per nine-hour day, which is probably nearly right.

The earnings per day 'for these two examples are as follow:-One-mile lead, five journeys, 17-4 yds. at 34 yds. per load, rate 4s 2d, per yd.; total £3 12s. 11d, per day. For the 25-miles lead, three loads of 31 yds., 104 yds. at 17s. 11d., total £9 8s. 2d. per day.

Mileage Per Day In Relation to Comparative Figures There seems to be a big difference between the two amounts. In comparing them, the mileage per day must be taken into consideration. For the one-mile lead the distance is 10 miles, whilst for the 25-miles lead it is 150 miles. For covering the 1.40.miles, -therefore, the operator gets the difference between the two totals, namely £5 15s. 3d., which is equivalent to 10d, per mile, precisely what I allowed for the charge for travelling only, with no allowance for time.

It will be interesting now to compare the above results with those which would accrue if the rates be those I set out as being suitable for standardization in Table III. It is not necessary to reproduce the figures in full ; I will quote the essential amounts as I proceed.

First, with regard to the one-mile lead. The allowance for terminal charge is lid. per yd. (that is for 40 minutes), the travelling charge per yd. is 6.33d. and the weightage is is, which may be taken as equivalent. to 45 minutes. The travelling time is five minutes-that is for running two miles at 25 m.p.h.-and, therefore, the total time is 90 minutes. That means that approxiMately six journeys can be completed per working day. In that time 24 yds. will have been carried at a rate of 2s. 6d. per yd., so that the day's earnings total £3.

For the eight-miles lead we have, again, lid, as the terminal charge per yd., 50.64d. as the travelling charge per yd. and the weightage 5d., which is equivalent to approximately 19 minutes. The travelling time for 16 miles ,at 25tri.p.h. is approximately 39 minutes, so that the total time allowed for the eight-miles lead is 1 hour 39 minutes. At that rate an average of 54. journeys will be made per day ; that will be achieved by making six journeys on one day and five on the next. • Vie average yardage per day will be 22 and the revenue at 5s. 7d. per yd. (from

cc able III) £6 2s. 10d. • ,

For the 25-nilles haul we have, as before, 1.1.d, as the terminal charge per yd.. 158.25d. for the travelling charge per yd. and a rate of 14s. 2c1„ The total time for the , round journey will be approximately 2 hours 40minutes, ' which means that the average 'number of journeys per day . will be no more than 3+, say lour journeys on one day and " three on the next. The tonnage carried per day is, thus, 14, and, at 14s. 2d. per ion, that brings in a revenue of £9 18s. 4d.

Again, it will be found on comparing the differences in revenue from these various leads that it is due entirely to the difference in mileage assessed on the basis of 10d. per mile, as before.

A point that now occurs to me, which may be worth con

• sideration on some future occasion, is that operators who compile rates schedules such as those in Table VII, in which, in my opinion, the increase per ton mile lead is insufficient -especially in the longer leads-may be content to earn a profit up to a given lead mileage and thereafter to ntn at cost. It seems a foolish proceeding to me, but it is the only possible explanation of such anomalies as I am about

to describe in relation to the schedule of rates in Table VII.

The first thing that struck -me about that schedule was the comparatively small increase in rate per mile increase in lead. The rate per ton for a 10-miles lead-is, for example, 4S. 6d., whilst that for a 20-Miles lead is 7s. 3c1.

Now, assuming that a 5-tonner be used, the revenue per journE:y for a 10-miles lead, in which the vehicle must run .20 miles, is £1 2s. 6d.; that from a 20-miles haul, running 40 miles, is £1 18s. 3d. The difference ie 13s. 9d. and that is for a difference in mileage of 20, so that all the operator is obtaining for running those 20 miles is 8+d. per mile.

The position is no better if we assume that 6-ton loads be carried. In that case, the revenue for a 10-miles haul will be 11 7s. and that for a 20-miles haul £2 3s. Gd. The difference is 16s. 6(.1. 'and that, for 20 miles of running, is equivalent to only 9.9d. per mile.

If these figures be compared with actual costs the difficulty of understanding why there should be so little increase per mile lead is aggravated.

" Take the case of a 5-tonner, in connection with which the standing charges, including licence, wages, • insurance, -garage rent, tax and interest on first cost, will amount to ' no less than £7 per week, to which must be added V for "establishment costs, making £10 per week; or" 4s. 2d. per hour. To-day, the running costs are 6k1. per mile.

-Now, assume that it takes four-fifths of an hour to run those 20 miles, that is 35. 4d. for that time, plus 10s. 10(1.

for 20 miles at then the total is 14s. 2d„ as against the 13.9, 9d. difference shown above. Therefore, the bare cost of operation is greater than the additional earnings from the extra 20 miles of running.

The case for the 6-tonner is even worse. The weekly -standing charges amount to £1 10s. and adding £3 19s. for establishment costs we get £11 per week, or 4s. 7d. per hour. The running costs, to-day, are Sd. The net cost of running 20 miles is thus four-fifths of 4s. 7d., which is 3s. Sd., plus 20 miles at 8d. (13s. 4d.), the total net cost being 17s., as against the 15s. 6d., which is all the extra revenue the operator makes for increasing the lead from 10 miles to 20 miles.

If the figures for 50 miles and 60 miles be compared the deficit in revenue as compared with cost is even greater. For a 50-miles lead the rate is 13.5. tiel. per ton,, whilst for a 60-Miles lead it is 15s. 3d. per ton.

If 5-ton loads be carried the revenue for 50 miles is £3 7s. Id., whilst that for 60 miles is £3 16s. 3d., a difference of as little as 9s. 2d., as against the difference in cost, already shown, of 14s. 2d. Actually, the operator is earning

only 5*(1. per mile run for a 5-tuber over those 20 miles, which is ridiculously low and, obviously, inadequate.

If the vehicle used be a 6-tanner the revenue for 50 miles is 80s. 6d. and that for 60 miles is 91s. 6(1., a difference of 11s., as against a net operating cost of 19s. This 6-tonner. for those 20 miles is being run at 6.6d. per mile.

CIVer the shorter leads the revenue which will accrue by working at these rates is, one might say, ample.

A 5-tonner, over a five-miles lead, would probably do not less than 32 trips per week, which means that the vehicle

runs 320 miles. The revenue is that for carrying 180 tons at 3s. 2d. per ton, which is £25 Os. 8(1. The cost comprises 210 "for fixed charges, plus 320 miles at Cid., which is '18 13s. 4d., a total of £18 13s. 4d., leaving a net profit of 16 13s. 4d.

When the lead increases to 10 miles, however, and assumthg that 24 trips be made, per week, the revenue, which is that for 120 tons at. 45. 6d. per toe, is £27. The cost is 123 10s., so that the net profit per week when engaged on a 10-miles lead, is only £3 19s. Similarly, over a 20-miles lead the revenue can be shown to be £29, as against a cost of £27 6s, Sd., so that the het profit has now fallen to £1 13s. 4d. per week.

At 50-miles lead the revenue_ is only 120 2s. 6(1. and the cost £26 5s., showing an actual loss of £6 2s. 6(1. per week. . These figures,and corresponding information relating to the operation of a 6-tonner over similar leads, are shown in

Tables VIII and' IX. S.T.R.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus